Poll: Soldier Gene Pool
Posted 25 July 2003 - 11:51 AM
Do I fire the soldiers aren't good enough to stand a real chance and recruit some new ones hoping for better stats ? Or do I spend my entire money on good equipment and base growth knowing that the first is my only real chance (soldiers are getting better) and the second takes very long ? Will better stats at the beginning be for naught if they die on the first Terror trip (this is linked to the "Do you reload" Poll) ? Or will I get extremely good soldiers around July if the Gene Pool was considered from the beginning (Money is not an issue later on - Experience is!)
Hope you catch me! VOTE! This is gonna be interesting...
Posted 25 July 2003 - 11:54 AM
Edited by j'ordos, 25 July 2003 - 03:16 PM.
"The mind is like an umbrella, it functions best when open" - Walter Gropius
SNEKK BLOG U-LAR MEKHH! GAHGHH! RK!
GRRGH RGGHH SNORRTT GHACKHGG
Now presented in DoubleVision (where drunk)
Posted 25 July 2003 - 12:39 PM
Posted 25 July 2003 - 12:46 PM
I'm with Raven on this. The good ones live and become great, and the bad ones fill in the suicide spots I need. That, and I'm always short of cash...
Celatid venom is a paralytic nerve toxin, not 'happy juice".
Posted 25 July 2003 - 01:33 PM
Posted 25 July 2003 - 01:51 PM
my vote comes from the circumstance that i really HATE loosing my soldiers but don't load when someone dies (except my favorite ). In my experience it proved that if i had a couple of guys who were really fast and some who got some above-average shooting ability by a margin, i could specialize from the beginning - the snipers guard my back (with reaction shots if no alien's there) and the runners pushing from hiding place to hiding place for scouting.
When I intend to start a game like that and realise that my team was generally bad-luck low on those stats, i decide to give it a go with up to 3 soldiers which are replaced in the next couple of days. Since i'd play w/o tanks altogether then - i got some cash left at the beginning.
BUT A BIG BUT HERE! I only employ this tactic now and then when i feel like it - but in superhuman i almost always need to do that to increase my survival chance - point ratio at the end of month.
I agree that PSI strength comes with the bad fighters ever so often. But i don't intend to root out psi strength altogether... balance decides, no ?
Posted 25 July 2003 - 02:11 PM
Posted 25 July 2003 - 02:45 PM
i am with you , i once had a rookie, never went to a mission with a strengh of 80 on psi
No, I use what I have knowing that the bad ones can become good. Besides with me PSI strength is very importantl. I've found many times that otherwise great soldiers are absolute PSI wimps who i end up firing whilst, seeming bad soldiers have great PSI and so i decide to keep them and have them improve through combat.
r00ks can be sometimes usefull.
and yoru right abotu bad ones become good. i never fire anyone, if the soldier dies or or sucky hes dead.
i would feal bad for a strong soldier but game must go on.
Posted 25 July 2003 - 03:13 PM
You know when i first saw the topic i thought that zwn was talking about using editors to "genetically enhance" soldiers. His idea is novel but I think in the long run it would cost too much and take too long.
Posted 26 July 2003 - 10:27 PM
Posted 31 July 2003 - 11:35 AM
Its fun only to have 10 men, but have maxed them out, and not buying anyone, unless i only have 3 left or something, and those i do not turn.
BTW, if you are unhappy with their stats, you restart the game....stoopid!
Edited by mikker, 31 July 2003 - 11:38 AM.
the truth about scientology
Some people say that dreams are a portal to the subconscious. If that is so, I am a very disturbed person.
Posted 13 August 2003 - 07:56 PM
it is how you could die that scares you.
Posted 13 August 2003 - 10:19 PM
Not in the beginning though. I give all the bad soldiers name "rambo" or something to know they are full of 5h1t and use them as rambo would do, alone against impossible enemy
Later when Psi comes relevant, I fire all with below 60 psi defense.. Often it means that I have to fire my best soldiers but who cares if you can't use them anyway? (I won't use them 'cause they are allways panicked and in alien control ) So then sometimes a Rambo from beginning has survived from a lot of missions and has become a great warrior with 99 psi defense. This really happens sometimes.
Posted 18 August 2003 - 07:08 AM
Posted 04 October 2003 - 07:20 AM
also, i waste far too much money at start to buy replacementsd
Posted 04 October 2003 - 07:48 AM
Other than them they are all dead in not too long. Next month I actually start to care about anyone who has managed to survive "H.E.L.L Month" and they get some armour after a little bit. I go through quite a few soldier until I get Psi ::
Posted 28 November 2003 - 04:55 PM
Personally I look at accuracy first. If they don't have at least a 40 accuracy things arn't looking rosy for their continued carrier as an X-Com rookie.
Next Strength, minimum of 30
Bravery minimum of 20.
PSI minimum 90
Reaction minimum 30
I will occasionally accept lower stats in other areas if either accuracy or strength is praticularly high. I had one sniper in a game a while back who showed up on my doorstep with a bravery of 10 but an accuracy of 70. He actually did pretty well since once I got PSI tech he had rediculously high stats in that too. Those are definate exceptions though.
Edited by imperialus, 29 November 2003 - 12:03 AM.
Posted 28 November 2003 - 05:57 PM
Posted 28 November 2003 - 06:38 PM
Posted 28 November 2003 - 08:46 PM
Posted 29 November 2003 - 12:02 AM
I suppose I just don't like paying the monthly fees for a soldier better suited to peeling potatos. I also try and keep my casualty rate as low as possible so anyone not worth keeping I sack.
I've never worried too much about money. Once I get a pair of manufactureing bases turning out lazer cannons I'm pulling in enough to make microsoft's quarterly profits look like a mom and pop shop.
Posted 01 December 2003 - 12:43 PM
Posted 02 December 2003 - 11:10 AM
I prefer 56 TUs... but 53 as the min works to
Minimum 53 TUs, 30 bravery and 50 firing accuracy.
My conscience is clear, therefore I am guilty of having a bad memory.
Posted 08 December 2003 - 04:09 PM
Posted 08 December 2003 - 10:51 PM
Oops one exception to that early on: if the soldier is gonna take like 2 months to heal they're gone.
I only sack late in the game based on Psionic Strength; any new soldier under 100 is axed. Early in the game I /would/ only sack for low reactions (and nothing else) but in this case sacking is better known as scouting, opening doors, etc.
Posted 11 December 2003 - 08:57 PM
I didn't listen when they said the purpose of rookies is to open a door with two primed grenedes
it is how you could die that scares you.
Posted 15 March 2004 - 11:02 AM